Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33723384›Full record

ArticleNeuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology2021

Cognitive subtypes in recent onset psychosis: distinct neurobiological fingerprints?

Julian Wenzel, Shalaila S Haas, Dominic B Dwyer, Anne Ruef, Oemer Faruk Oeztuerk, Linda A Antonucci, Sebastian von Saldern, Carolina Bonivento, Marco Garzitto, Adele Ferro and 12 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Cognitive subtypes in youth at clinical high risk for psychosis.Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors.

Julian WenzelUniversity of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Shalaila S HaasDepartment of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Dominic B DwyerDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.
Anne RuefDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.
Oemer Faruk OeztuerkDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.
Linda A AntonucciDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.
Sebastian von SaldernDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.
Carolina BoniventoScientific Institute, IRCCS Eugenio Medea, San Vito al Tagliamento, Italy.
Marco GarzittoScientific Institute, IRCCS Eugenio Medea, San Vito al Tagliamento, Italy.
Adele FerroDepartment of Neurosciences and Mental Health, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.
Marco PaoliniDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.
Janusch BlautzikInstitute for Radiology and Nuclear Medicine St. Anna, Luzern, Switzerland.
Stefan BorgwardtTranslational Psychiatry Unit (TPU), Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Luebeck, Luebeck, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5792-3987
Paolo BrambillaDepartment of Neurosciences and Mental Health, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4021-8456
Eva MeisenzahlDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Raimo K R SalokangasDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8532-1596
Rachel UpthegroveSchool of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Stephen J WoodSchool of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Joseph KambeitzUniversity of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8988-3959
Nikolaos Koutsouleris *Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Ludwig-Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.
Lana Kambeitz-Ilankovic *University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. lana.kambeitz-ilankovic@uk-koeln.de.
PRONIA consortium

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In schizophrenia, neurocognitive subtypes can be distinguished based on cognitive performance and they are associated with neuroanatomical alterations. We investigated the existence of cognitive subtypes in shortly medicated recent onset psychosis patients, their underlying gray matter volume patterns and clinical characteristics. We used a K-means algorithm to cluster 108 psychosis patients from the multi-site EU PRONIA (Prognostic tools for early psychosis management) study based on cognitive performance and validated the solution independently (N = 53). Cognitive subgroups and healthy controls (HC; n = 195) were classified based on gray matter volume (GMV) using Support Vector Machine classification. A cognitively spared (N = 67) and impaired (N = 41) subgroup were revealed and partially independently validated (N

Indexed as

Psychotic DisordersSchizophreniaBrainCognitionGray MatterHumans

Identifiers

PMID33723384
PMCPMC8209013

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.